Client Number: xxx
Enquiry Number: 848438Dear Mr Lister,
As agreed, I am putting in writing the advice I gave you over the telephone on 30th August .
My colleague was correct in advising that under paragraph 9 to Schedule 8 of the Building Safety Act 2022 No service charge is payable under a qualifying lease in respect of legal or other professional services relating to the liability (or potential liability) of any person incurred as a result of a relevant defect.
However, the problem is that Taylor Wimpey is not a party to the lease and is not making a service charge to leaseholders for the costs of an additional survey. They are simply refusing to pay for it themselves, so the above clause does not really help.
The developers' which was signed up to by Taylor Wimpey in March this year, states that they will :-
take responsibility for performing, or otherwise at our discretion, funding self-remediation and/or mitigation works to address life-critical fire-safety issues on all our buildings of 11 metres and above in England that we have developed or refurbished…
Further in the Pledge it states :-
Such work will address life-critical fire-safety defects arising from design, construction or refurbishment defects on Buildings which a Participant Developer played a role in developing or refurbishing (as applicable). This excludes situations where defects have arisen solely as a result of any alterations and/or failure to maintain following completion of construction or refurbishment, as the case may be (the above being, the “Obligation”).
I cannot see anywhere in the document that deals with them paying for the initial report to ascertain if there are “life critical fire safety issues”.
Although you state that they already have a copy of the EWS1 commissioned by your managing agent which, presumably, does indicate problems sufficient for them to agree to fund the work.
To me, it sounds like Taylor Wimpey is not complying with the spirit of the pledge, if not the exact wording.
You could consider contacting the Department for Levelling up Housing & Communities about this possible failure to honour the pledge.
The Pledge was supposed to be made into a contractually binding obligation between the signatories and the DLUHC . However, in early August the developers, via the House Builders Federation, refused to sign the contract on the basis that the wording of the contract went further than their initial pledge. I am not aware of any progress since then.
I hope my comments prove helpful, but if you have any questions please feel free to contact LEASE again quoting your Client Number xxxxxx. You can book an appointment for telephone advice using this link - https://clients.lease-advice.org/#/
Yours sincerely,
Simon Tye
Legal Adviser
The Leasehold Advisory Service
www.lease-advice.org
2 Marsham Street, London, SW1P 4DF.
Telephone: 020 7832 2500
Email: info@lease-advice.org
Fax: 020 7832 2529
Enquiry submitted: 30/08/2022